Senate candidate Coats posts lobbying records

Former GOP Sen. Dan Coats posted more than 800 pages of lobbying records on his website Saturday in an effort to clear up
questions about his past and respond to attacks Democrats have leveled against him for months.

The information, which includes Coats' version of his client list along with previously available records, didn't
stem the flood of Democratic criticism against Coats, a former lobbyist hoping to beat Democratic Rep. Brad Ellsworth to return
to the U.S. Senate. But Coats hoped the records will give voters a more accurate picture of his background.

"Hoosiers have a good ear for truth and fairness," he said Saturday in a conference call with reporters.

Democrats have linked Coats with Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, the Middle Eastern nation of Yemen and this week—
as the massive oil spill dominates headlines — BP.

Coats said he's never worked for Chavez, Yemen or BP and that such charges are "offensive" and "ludicrous."

Ellsworth spokeswoman Elizabeth Farrar said legal documents, lobbying reports and previous statements show he was lobbying
for Wall Street and foreign nations. She called the effort by Coats a "panicked attempt to rewrite history before November."

"When it comes to disclosing his special interest lobbying ties, Dan Coats is 100 days late and a dollar short,"
she said. "In fact, this latest installment in the Dan Coats' lobbying saga raises more questions than it provides
answers, the biggest of which is what version of this story are Hoosiers supposed to believe?"

Indiana Democratic Party Chairman Dan Parker said in a statement that voters "are right to question who he would represent
if elected to the United States Senate — Indiana families or his corporate clients." He said Coats shouldn't
shirk responsibility for the actions of his firm.

"As the Co-Chair of the King & Spalding's Government Advocacy and Public Policy division, Dan Coats is responsible
for the clients and issues that his firm lobbies on, period," Parker said. "Dan Coats' firm was paid millions
by these clients — money that helped pay his salary."

Coats said he was not responsible for all clients at his firm and that he was the titular head of the government advocacy
and public policy division. He said his name helped attract clients, but did not oversee day-to-day operations of the division.
So Parker's accusations that he was connected to all the firm's clients since they paid the firm money that was later
used to help pay his salary was "a pretty slim thread," Coats said.

He said he operated on the basis that he would be held accountable for those whom he lobbied for, and that he only took clients
who did not run counter to his beliefs and ethical principles. He said he was up front with them by saying: "Look, you
don't want me to do this because my heart won't be in it.

"I can't lobby effectively for something I don't believe in," Coats said.

Brian Vargus, a political science professor at IUPUI, said it is too soon to tell whether voters will agree with Coats'
assertion that his record is being distorted or whether they will be skeptical now that Coats has posted the information.

"In general, when you look at any of these races and somebody gets the title 'lobbyist' … that title in and
of itself is a bad label," Vargus said. "It conjures up all kinds of images for the average American."

As the campaign moves forward, Vargus said Coats will try to distance himself from the lobbyist label. How much voters pay
attention to the claims about Coats will depend, he said, on what kinds of solutions are put forward in the campaign —
such as ways to improve the employment picture.

"If they see the Democrats as more likely to help them out, then that's going to be much more important," Vargus
said.

This week, Democrats linked Coats to BP because the oil giant is a client of King and Spalding. Coats said he never lobbied
for BP and said he has stopped buying BP gasoline because of the oil spill.

Coats said BP should be held fully liable for damages.

"They have to accept the consequences of their practices," he said. "They reap the benefits of drilling."

Democrats also point out that Coats voted for a 1990 bill to limit oil pollution to $75 million, a bill that had unanimous
support. Now, Coats believes that limit should be higher, although he said he's not sure that efforts to set the cap at
$10 billion hit the right target.

Coats said the attacks are Democrats' way of avoiding real issues that should be discussed in the campaign.

"This comes with the territory," he said. "It's unfortunate."

Democrats have been hounding Coats for his lobbying background since he entered the race in February, shortly before Democrat
Sen. Evan Bayh announced that he would not seek re-election. Coats said it took a long time — hundreds or even thousands
of hours — to dig through old and sometimes inaccurate records to get everything straightened out.